@Mottizen's banner p

Mottizen


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 November 28 03:47:21 UTC

				

User ID: 1936

Mottizen


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 November 28 03:47:21 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 1936

The vast majority of advertising spending accomplishes absolutely nothing. I've worked in senior Marketing management and it's hilarious how bad attribution and tracking actually is.

As a result, to survive and prosper as a Marketing-type you've got to be seen to be doing things, and this kind of provocativeness is perfect. Any 'old heads' within your industry who question it are whatever-phobic resisters of change, and if the campaign fails you're simply before your time.

I mean I feel the modern moment makes it tricky.

I've done a lot of dating in the last year or two trying to find 'the one', whatever that means, and yet it's been my experience that if I'm not trying to storm the proverbial castle in terms of sexual and physical escalation within 2-3 dates that I'm going to get automatically discarded as a potential partner due to the women getting confused and ultimately talking themselves out of the interaction.

As a result, I've spun off more than a few cases where it's 2-3 dates in, we sleep together and then the relationship fails to happen for whatever reason. There's a lot of dealbreakers you can't really figure out on that small a sample, and yet I feel I have to put out or I'm not going to even get a chance to take things slowly. In an ideal universe I'd be perfectly happy if my current dating stanza involved me just actually getting to that stage with one woman (provided she was the The One) but yet to be competitive in the marketplace I need to swing myself around.

Lack of good male role models/instructionals in the field of 'how to get bitches' leads to the Tates of the world getting pre-eminence since they're atleast offering something positive and actionable.

Like I'm not a huge fan of Jordan Peterson but a lot of the critics of his side of the manosphere just don't acknowledge how little the current left-dominated media really attempts to set men up to be successful or upwardly mobile. Tate might be a cartoon character but atleast he's something.

Autism's a weird subject since the diagnosis gets thrown around super liberally for any sort of 'does not play nice with others' psychological diagnosis, and it's such a wide spectrum.

My mom used to work at a private school dedicated to let's say 5th-10th percentile intelligences. Not the absolute lowest rung, but the one above it. The vast majority of her students had diagnoses for Autism (along with whatever myriad difficulties they had) and were essentially incapable of functioning above a 4th-grade level. When that bloc is contributing to the statistics, it's very hard to be successful on the aggregate. Without going into the amount of criminals or ne'er-do-wells hit the psychological diagnosis arena and get 7 different things assigned, one of which is invariably ASD. These people are already on an atrocious course and further drag down averages. It is my belief that if diagnosis was a firmer line and was universal, that the gap would be a lot smaller.

The most 'successful'/able-to-cope Autistics are also unlikely to ever pick up a formal diagnosis, especially if they're presently older than mid thirties. I'm diagnosed with what was Aspergers. My dad is a very successful engineer who is 99% to also get diagnosed (and indeed self-diagnosed after I received the diagnosis) if he ever had occasion to pursue it, but as he's now in his mid 70s, retired and in no need of psychological assistance he's unlikely to ever get his autism certificate.

I feel like you are picturing the 'average autistic person' as a FANG developer who struggles with dating/social contact but is otherwise able to get some benefits out of the quirk in their brain chemistry. This is a person who's like 85th percentile.

I'm very newly a father. My daughter is 3 days old. I'm turning 30 this year, and the general reaction I got from talking to my friends & strangers was very 'wow that's young to be doing it' or 'how can you afford this'. I was the youngest person in my highschool scholarship class in a good upper middle class suburb by about a year, 30 people of whom most have gone on to be Doctors, Dentists, Developers and other Desirable roles. I'm the only to have reproduced, and at this rate I'm the only one who even looks particularly close to it. My university cohort's fairly similar, with similar professional attainment.

The big themes I noticed when talking to people about why they haven't taken the leap are generally some combination of not owning housing, being stuck in the dating app treadmill, protecting their free lifestyles to do 'cool, spontaneous things' and versions of 'my potential children will inherit the apocalypse'

None of the doomish Covid predictions came true either because people voluntarily stayed home when the risk was highest.

None of the Doomish COVID predictions were at all possible or plausible even if everybody dropped whatever they were doing and decided to run an orgy every night from 2020-2022

I'd honestly assumed Scott Adams would have been cancelled already by now. What took this so long?

The great irony of JK Rowling is that a decade ago she was seen as being laughably, annoyingly left-wing on most issues. She's literally in alignment with woke thought on everything but the Trans issue, and her insistence on being vocal about her thoughts (Which was generally met with applause and cheering till she commented on Trans individuals) is what's led to this situation.

Most equivalent pop culture figures just don't vocalize their opinions.

I've worked in Sports betting marketing, and it's very much a similar thing. Women, largely, do not punt on sports. That is essentially an unalterable physical law of the universe, and yet I've seen a series of hare-brained schemes to 'double the market'

The sheer nebulousness of the Yes case made it hard to directly misinform, too. So many of the 'X is misinformation' articles I saw were of the 'The No campaign's speculative rebuttal of a potential aspect of the Voice is inaccurate since we've yet to establish what the Voice actually is/does'

I've always figured that this sort of study simply identifies that the businesses that are sufficiently tech-orientated and abstracted away from people doing any actual productive work being able to essentially carry trophy diversity without it significantly hitting the bottom line.

Think it's dependent on your lifestyle as well.

If you're a desk jockey in reasonable weight and live in a cool climate you can probably get away with infrequent showering. If you're slaving away on a plantation you're going to have issues.

Honestly the whole phenomenon of people being superadverse to body odor and such confuses me, since like... 99.999995% of human history would ostensibly have been totally intolerable to people in 2022. In my father (who's in his mid 70s now)'s upbringing, baths were a weekly thing and more than that was considered extravagant. Obviously trends like the reduction in smoking would increase olfactory awareness, but it still seems absurd how precious most people are about scents.

I'll obey hygiene conventions, but personally tend to just be unbothered by sweat (within reason) due to having done a lot of contact sports and thus have never understood the sheer vehemence some people have towards very minor amounts of sweat.

Yeah the entire point of female sexuality/seduction is plausible deniability. A girl who's into you will suddenly become gigantically gullible/culpable to the most overt and sleazy approaches, but will claim ignorance if the vibe's gone.

I've chatted with female friends who are convinced they're sending strong signals to other guys in their chats about potential romantic dalliance... then read the actual chats and it's been the most passive/friendly convo ever that they're convinced is them leading a wild romantic chase.

Also seen a lot of cases where a girl's absolutely fawned over some loose male potential and completely refused to lead and/or 'been ghosted' when the convo is prettymuch as follows


Random dude: 'My love, shall we picnic in the park this eve'

Girl: 'K'

Random Dude: 'When are you available? What is your ring size?'

Girl: 'Like React'

Random Dude: 'Are you free this Friday, my swan?'

Girl: Maybe

Then they accost me with 'why did I get left on read' and it's like... dude was trying his utmost best to get a sign of interest from you and eventually assumed you were trying to signal him to fuck off.


But like I understand the feminine impulse. The consequences of misplaced affections for men tend to be out-and-out rejection, whilst the consequences for a woman will trend far more towards getting fuckbuddyzoned/strung along for novelty's sake.

As somebody who's managed to land a highly paid bullshit sinecure of a job in an actively malicious industry, occasionally I wake up in the morning and think 'Gee I'd like to action changes upon the world that can help people during my limited time on Earth', then I read accounts like this and I remember that restrictive bureaucracy is alive and well in every field!

USA is hardly a pure ethnostate of the most productive demographics. Cut 2 or 3 geographic regions or 2 or 3 ethnicities and it'd be similarly buoyed.

On top of that, women tend to rely on immutable traits i.e. beauty

Honestly from having done a bunch of dating in the modern era, the rise of obesity means that unless a girl is like... bottom 10th percentile genetically she's got scope to get to 6/10 simply by being in shape. I feel like a lot of the takes around the immutability of beauty made more sense before 30-40% of the population enthusiastically nuked themselves in the foot and modern cosmetics.

The whole 'Anti Asian Hate' rhetoric has always felt like a weird attempt to bandwagon racial animosity/'Me Too' the whole BLM thing.

In the vast majority of Western nations, especially the developed post-colonial ones, Asians have the best average life outcomes in terms of education, income, crime, lifespan etc.

I think you're wildly oversimplifying the 'simply take over a business from a retiring boomer' thing. I used to work for one of those, and whilst it was sold with a fairly reliable source of income (Pre-Apple Store Apple importer who still had a license to do repairs on Apple hardware that the Apple Store refused to due to being a generation or two out of date). The seller refused to actually retire and kept servicing his best clients directly (who were largely also superboomers who'd had him as their 'computer guy' since 1980 and didn't want to get computers from anybody else), plus the actual business model itself was really coasting on inertia after being a good idea 30 years ago. You can't really steal the customers here since they're not price-sensitive, they just want to do their very intermittent tech purchasing from the guy who they got their first handshake from 30 years ago.

A lot of these incredibly profitable small businesses are coasting on servicing fellow boomers and based on the operator's relationship network.

All porn can be used as cuckold porn if the viewer imagines themselves to have a particular relationship to the performers but that doesn't mean all porn inherently is cuckold porn. You could make the same argument about basically all forms of entertainment, that watching/listening/reading about other people achieving great things must lead the audience to either delusionally imagine themselves in such a situation or spiral into inferiority and take masochistic pleasure in that inferiority.

Honestly wonder if the recent surge in cuckold porn has something to do with how it injects a ton of taboo/shock value to a scene, without requiring a ton more budget or extremism to actually film. I know a guy who's a mid-grade porn producer, and he's told me that the whole 'stepcest' trend is also an example of this. Since you can turn a vanilla scene into a stepcest scene with literally 10 words added to the script and not having to pay the talent for doing anything especially physically arduous.

It happens a lot with these Alexander/Caesar/Hitler/Gustavus Adolphus/Tom Brady figures. They win so much and so hard they see themselves as infallible and end up embarrassing themselves on a low-odds gamble, like playing football at 45 or invading Russia.

A lot of the entrepreneurial types are just built like that. Tendency to continually go all-in since it's all they know, until it eventually falls in a heap. I'm reminded of a small business I used to contract for that was run by a guy who'd gone from millionaire-to-bankrupt about 4 times in his life, and was still plugging away in his late 70's. He wasn't super intelligent, but he had weasel cunning and just kept headbutting brick walls until either he or they broke. Especially since he was aware that if he wasn't pushing himself in business he'd inevitably drink and/or gamble and/or whore away all his money, anyway. Kinda inspiring in its own way.

I've honestly always wanted to see a proper, unbiased longitudinal study of the Stolen Generation to establish what the life outcomes of the 'stolen' were versus those who remained remote. I suspect the results would shock the common narrative.

Having read Dark Emu I found it kind of incoherent where a lot of the case for Aboriginal statehood is essentially 'they were unsophisticated to the point that there was not a conventional state to be made war on and/or a concept of territory, therefore the conquest is illegitimate as they never surrendered' then Dark Emu tries to argue that they were notably more sophisticated than the basic understanding which... legitimizes European conquest?

very few rungs on the ladder for a hard worker to climb (basically worker < supervisor <<< owner).

Honestly that's something I've increasingly noticed as I reach my late twenties and look at my friends.

Majority of whom have somewhat capped out in the first 3-4 rungs of their career where it's worker-centric & essentially an automatic promotion every couple years for just being technically proficient, and now it's way more of a patience/politics game to ascend managerial rungs. I managed to sidestep a lot of that via being super aggressive with company-switching + using some startups to get to a position of early seniority, but increasingly noticing my compatriots stalling out.

Old rappers are not going on tour, unlike old rockers

How much of that is the relative newness of rap, though? Along with the preponderance of solo acts meaning that death/disability to a name means that it can't be Ship of Theseus'd like a lot of bands are at this point.